| Literature DB >> 30131855 |
Lei Zhong1, Xia He1, Yuan Zhang1, Jun-Lan Chuan1, Min Chen1, Shao-Min Zhu2, Qian Peng3.
Abstract
Methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase (MTHFR) is a critical enzyme influencing the metabolism of fluoropyrimidines. The relevance of MTHFR polymorphisms with the clinical response to fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy has been explored, but the results remain controversial. Thus, a meta-analysis was performed to provide a comprehensive estimate in this account. Relevant studies were identified through PubMed, Embase and Web of Science databases from inception up to May 2017. Odds ratios (ORs) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were applied to assess the strength of association. A total of 2118 colorectal cancer patients from 21 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, there was no significant association between MTHFR C677T (rs1801133) or A1298C (rs1801131) polymorphisms and the clinical response to fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy under all of the three genetic models (allele model, dominant model, and recessive model) and stratification analysis, except for the retrospective study subgroup in the dominant model of MTHFR C677T and the "5-Fu + FA" treatment group in the allele contrast of MTHFR A1298C. No or moderate heterogeneity was observed in all genetic models. This meta-analysis suggested that MTHFR polymorphisms could not be considered as reliable factors for predicting the clinical response to fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy in colorectal cancer patients.Entities:
Keywords: MTHFR; chemotherapy response; fluoropyrimidine; meta-analysis; polymorphism
Year: 2018 PMID: 30131855 PMCID: PMC6101282 DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.24933
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Oncotarget ISSN: 1949-2553
Figure 1Flow diagram of study selection
Characteristics of the studies included in the meta-analysis
| Study (year) | Ethnicity | Clinical data gathering | Patients, | Age, mean (range) | Chemotherapy regimens | Definition of responders | Definition of non- responders | MTHFR SNP | Method of MTHFR SNP analysis | HWE reported and in equilibrium? | Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wisotzkey JD, | Caucasian | Retrospective | 51 (–) | – | 5-Fu | Alive without any evidence of cancer | Dead or alive with cancer | C677T | PCR-RFLP | Not reported | 12 |
| Cohen V, | Mixed crowd | Retrospective | 43 (62.8) | 59 (43–70) | 5-Fu/LV, Capecitabine, UFT | CR, PR | SD, PD | C677T | PCR- | Not reported | 13 |
| Etienne MC, | Caucasian | Retrospective | 98 (58.2) | 64 (40–82) | 5-Fu | CR, PR | SD, PD | C677T A1298C | PCR-HRM | Yes | 14 |
| Jakobsen A, | Caucasian | Retrospective | 88 (57) | 62 (–) | 5-Fu | CR, PR | SD, PD | C677T A1298C | PCR-RFLP | Not reported | 15 |
| Marcuello E, | Caucasian | Prospective | 94 (72) | 68 (43–83) | 5-Fu | CR, PR | SD, PD | C677T A1298C | RT-PCT | Not reported | 16 |
| Suh KW, | Asian | Retrospective | 54 (55.6) | 57.8 (35–79) | FOLFOX | CR, PR, SD | PD | C677T | sequencing | Yes | 17 |
| Terrazzino S, | Caucasian | Retrospective | 125 (64) | 60 (31–79) | 5-FU, | TRG 1-2 | TRG 3-5 | C677T A1298C | PCR- | Yes | 18 |
| Capitain O, | Caucasian | Retrospective | 76 (60.5) | 71 (39–88) | 5-Fu | CR, PR | SD, PD | C677T A1298C | sequencing | Yes | 19 |
| Huang MY, | Asian | Prospective | 201 (58.7) | 62 | 5-Fu | Non-early recurrence | Early recurrence | C677T | PCR-RFLP | Not reported | 20 |
| Ruzzo A, | Caucasian | Prospective | 146 (54.8) | 61 (38–75) | FOLFIRI | CR, PR | SD, PD | C677T A1298C | PCR-RFLP | Yes | 21 |
| Balboa E, | Caucasian | Prospective | 65 (76.9) | 64 | 5-Fu/Capecitabine | TRG 1-2 | TRG 3-5 | C677T A1298C | SnapShot | Yes | 22 |
| Etienne MC, | Caucasian | Prospective | 117 (55.6) | 67 (31–80) | FOLFOX | CR, PR | SD, PD | C677T A1298C | PCR-HRM | Yes | 23 |
| Cecchin E, | Caucasian | Retrospective | 238 (66.8) | 61 | 5-Fu, 5-Fu | TRG 1-2 | TRG 4-5 | C677T A1298C | TaqMan assay | No | 24 |
| Lamas MJ, | Caucasian | Retrospective | 72 (69.4) | 66.5 (32–80) | FOLFOX, FOLFOX | CR, PR, SD | PD | C677T A1298C | SnapShot | Yes | 25 |
| Hu-Lieskovan S, | Caucasian | Retrospective | 130 (57) | 61 | 5-Fu | TRG 1 | TRG 2-5 | C677T A1298C | PCR-RFLP | Not reported | 26 |
| Budai B, | Caucasian | Prospective | 85 | _ | FOLFIRI | CR, PR | SD, PD | C677T | PCR-RFLP | Yes | 27 |
| Chai HN, | Asian | Prospective | 73 (61.6) | 59 (24–87) | FOLFOX | CR, PR | SD, PD | C677T | sequencing | Yes | 28 |
| Zhao J, | Asian | Retrospective | 154 (58.4) | 56 (30–75) | FOLFOX, XELOX, FOLFIRI | CR, PR | SD, PD | C677T A1298C | sequencing | Not reported | 29 |
| Lamas MJ, | Caucasian | Retrospective | 93 (73.1) | 67 (39–86) | 5-Fu | TRG 1-2 | TRG 3-5 | C677T A1298C | SnapShot | Yes | 30 |
| Kumamoto K, | Asian | Retrospective | 63 ( | 65 (32–84) | FOLFOX | CR, PR | SD, PD | C677T | PCR-RFLP | Not reported | 31 |
| Boudaoud K, | Caucasian | Retrospective | 52 (59.6) | 50.8 | 5-Fu | pCR | _ | C677T | PCR-RFLP | Not reported | 32 |
HWE, Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium; CR, complete response; PR, partial response; SD, stable disease; PD, progressive disease; pCR, pathologic complete response; TRG, tumor regression grading; PCR, polymerase chain reaction; RFLP, restriction fragment length polymorphism; HRM, High Resolution Melting.
Odds ratio with the corresponding 95% confidence interval, heterogeneity results, Egger’ test and Begg’ test for genetic contrasts of MTHFR C677T
| Models | Population | No. studies | Random effects OR (95% CI) | I2 (%) | Egger’ test | Begg’ test | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T versus C | All | 20 | 0.93 (0.78–1.12) | 0.064 | 34.8 | 0.766 | 0.721 |
| Caucasians | 15 | 0.95 (0.78–1.15) | 0.144 | 28.5 | 0.713 | 0.692 | |
| Asians | 4 | 0.73 (0.50–1.06) | 0.404 | 0.0 | 0.325 | 0.308 | |
| Prospective | 7 | 0.96 (0.73–1.27) | 0.212 | 28.4 | 0.102 | 0.230 | |
| Retrospective | 13 | 0.92 (0.72–1.18) | 0.060 | 41.1 | 0.369 | 0.760 | |
| ORR | 12 | 0.98 (0.77–1.24) | 0.114 | 34.6 | 0.978 | 0.373 | |
| TRG | 5 | 0.87 (0.57–1.35) | 0.029 | 63.0 | 0.703 | 0.806 | |
| 5-Fu | 5 | 0.98 (0.71–1.34) | 0.568 | 0.0 | 0.156 | 0.462 | |
| FOLFOX | 4 | 0.83 (0.46–1.50) | 0.042 | 63.4 | 0.058 | 0.308 | |
| Dominant model | All | 21 | 0.79 (0.63–1.00) | 0.117 | 27.8 | 0.884 | 0.928 |
| Caucasians | 15 | 0.79 (0.60–1.05) | 0.108 | 32.5 | 0.408 | 0.692 | |
| Asians | 5 | 0.68 (0.46–1.02) | 0.700 | 0.0 | 0.313 | 0.806 | |
| Prospective | 7 | 0.99 (0.67–1.47) | 0.179 | 32.7 | 0.167 | 0.101 | |
| Retrospective | 14 | 0.69 (0.53–0.90) | 0.306 | 13.4 | 0.273 | 0.189 | |
| ORR | 13 | 0.85 (0.62–1.15) | 0.156 | 28.7 | 0.854 | 0.951 | |
| TRG | 5 | 0.65 (0.37–1.11) | 0.071 | 53.6 | 0.757 | 1.000 | |
| 5-Fu | 5 | 0.75 (0.50–1.14) | 0.733 | 0.0 | 0.622 | 0.806 | |
| FOLFOX | 4 | 0.78 (0.35–1.73) | 0.056 | 60.4 | 0.164 | 0.734 | |
| Recessive model | All | 20 | 1.20 (0.91–1.57) | 0.151 | 24.9 | 0.389 | 0.315 |
| Caucasians | 15 | 1.26 (0.88–1.82) | 0.139 | 29.0 | 0.543 | 0.322 | |
| Asians | 4 | 0.67 (0.26–1.76) | 0.464 | 0.0 | 0.519 | 0.308 | |
| Prospective | 7 | 0.92 (0.58–1.47) | 0.641 | 0.0 | 0.481 | 0.368 | |
| Retrospective | 13 | 1.44 (0.89–2.33) | 0.085 | 37.3 | 0.351 | 0.583 | |
| ORR | 12 | 1.22 (0.78–1.92) | 0.195 | 25.3 | 0.320 | 0.537 | |
| TRG | 5 | 1.28 (0.63–2.61) | 0.077 | 52.5 | 0.570 | 0.462 | |
| 5-Fu | 5 | 1.82 (0.73–4.51) | 0.191 | 34.6 | 0.491 | 0.462 | |
| FOLFOX | 4 | 0.88 (0.35–2.25) | 0.268 | 23.9 | 0.132 | 0.089 |
ORR, objective response rate (CR, PR, SD and PD) as end point; TRG, tumor regression grading as end point; 5-Fu + FA, chemotherapy regimens including 5-Fu + folinic acid and 5-Fu + leucovorin; FOLFOX, fluorouracil + leucovorin + oxaliplatin.
Figure 2Forest plot (A) and sensitivity analysis (B) for the allele contrast of MTHFR C677T polymorphism and response to fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy.
Odds ratio with the corresponding 95% confidence interval, heterogeneity results, Egger’ test and Begg’ test for genetic contrasts of MTHFR A1298C
| Models | Population | No. studies | Random effects OR (95% CI) | I2 (%) | Egger’ test | Begg’ test | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C versus A | All | 12 | 0.96 (0.76–1.21) | 0.098 | 36.7 | 0.376 | 0.244 |
| Caucasians | 12 | 0.96 (0.76–1.21) | 0.098 | 36.7 | 0.376 | 0.244 | |
| Asians | 0 | ||||||
| Prospective | 4 | 1.17 (0.73–1.86) | 0.067 | 58.0 | 0.997 | 1.000 | |
| Retrospective | 8 | 0.87 (0.68–1.12) | 0.314 | 14.8 | 0.269 | 0.386 | |
| ORR | 7 | 0.90 (0.61–1.33) | 0.033 | 56.2 | 0.394 | 0.548 | |
| TRG | 5 | 1.02 (0.79–1.33) | 0.489 | 0.0 | 0.865 | 0.806 | |
| 5-Fu | 3 | 0.63 (0.41–0.97) | 0.670 | 0.0 | 0.490 | 1.000 | |
| Dominant model | All | 13 | 0.97 (0.73–1.28) | 0.123 | 32.4 | 0.360 | 0.428 |
| Caucasians | 12 | 0.98 (0.72–1.33) | 0.093 | 37.3 | 0.335 | 0.451 | |
| Asians | 1 | ||||||
| Prospective | 4 | 1.20 (0.62–2.31) | 0.041 | 63.7 | 0.965 | 0.734 | |
| Retrospective | 9 | 0.90 (0.68–1.19) | 0.403 | 3.9 | 0.129 | 0.175 | |
| ORR | 8 | 0.86 (0.57–1.30) | 0.070 | 46.5 | 0.555 | 0.711 | |
| TRG | 5 | 1.15 (0.81–1.64) | 0.496 | 0.0 | 0.540 | 0.806 | |
| 5-Fu | 3 | 0.62 (0.37–1.07) | 0.962 | 0.0 | 0.271 | 0.296 | |
| Recessive model | All | 12 | 0.87 (0.58–1.30) | 0.247 | 20.0 | 0.177 | 0.134 |
| Caucasians | 12 | 0.87 (0.58–1.30) | 0.247 | 20.0 | 0.177 | 0.134 | |
| Asians | 0 | ||||||
| Prospective | 4 | 1.40 (0.45–4.41) | 0.146 | 44.3 | 0.168 | 0.734 | |
| Retrospective | 8 | 0.78 (0.44–1.38) | 0.335 | 12.2 | 0.881 | 0.536 | |
| ORR | 7 | 1.05 (0.45–2.47) | 0.197 | 30.3 | 0.438 | 0.368 | |
| TRG | 5 | 0.80 (0.42–1.51) | 0.305 | 17.2 | 0.500 | 0.462 | |
| 5-Fu | 3 | 0.49 (0.13–1.86) | 0.235 | 31.0 | 0.260 | 1.000 |
ORR, objective response rate (CR, PR, SD and PD) as end point; TRG, tumor regression grading as end point; 5-Fu + FA, chemotherapy regimens including 5-Fu + folinic acid and 5-Fu + leucovorin.
Figure 3Forest plot (A) and sensitivity analysis (B) for the allele contrast of MTHFR A1298C polymorphism and response to fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy.
Figure 4Cumulative meta-analysis for the allele contrast of MTHFR C677T (A) and A1298C (B) polymorphisms.